HARTFORD, Conn. — State legislators were stunned during a late-night budget debate when a veteran Republican lawmaker stood up and read graphic references to the female anatomy from a school library book.

The exchange late Monday night became the talk of the state Capitol on Tuesday as some lawmakers defended the exchange and others dismissed it as unnecessary.

Rep. Anne Dauphinais of Danielson, who is among the Legislature’s most conservative Republicans, said she was concerned that portions of the “library bill” had been inserted into the 693-page state budget that lawmakers were debating at about 11 p.m. Monday. Dauphinais alleged the graphic language was available to state students and was giving examples from various books.

“Are you going to eat her -----?” Dauphinais read from a book known as “Me and Earl and the Dying Girl” on the House floor. “Yeah, Earl, I am going to eat her -----.”

The deputy House speaker who was overseeing the debate immediately banged the gavel and temporarily stopped Dauphinais from speaking.

“Madam, I would ask that we not try to use that type of language in the chamber and try to keep some decorum,” said state Rep. Juan Candelaria, a New Haven Democrat. “I know you were talking of specific books, but if we could refrain from those type of words because there are also people and children watching this debate. ... I would ask kindly if we could just use either a different word or something different just out of respect for others that might get offended. Thank you.”

Dauphinais responded, “Mr. Speaker, I stand here to share with the chamber the books that are available in our public school libraries to the very children you’re telling me that this language isn’t appropriate in this chamber. This is in elementary school libraries, approved by the very individuals that are supposed to be the experts.”

The exchange set off a firestorm of debate that spilled into the next day. Some said the issue was overblown and a distraction, while others said that young students are exposed to far more graphic and pornographic material available on their cellphones on a daily basis than in the seldom-used libraries.

The bill was designed to ensure that all libraries have written policies on how to purchase books and how to handle challenges to the content of the books, officials said. Some schools currently have no policies and in other cases, the policies are 30 years old and had not been revisited.

The book cited by Dauphinais, lawmakers said, is available in an elementary school in Waterbury, along with middle and high schools in Stamford, along with Ellington, New Britain, and Milford, among others. Other books are available at John F. Kennedy High School in Waterbury, E.O. Smith High School in Storrs, and East Hartford High School.

House Speaker Matt Ritter of Hartford, who has two children, said the issue backfired on Republicans.

“For the socially moderate, fiscally conservative Republicans that still exist in Connecticut, to know that your entire budget debate comes down to somebody who wants to make this a cultural issue and use words like that, would probably anger me,” Ritter told reporters Tuesday. “Do I think that most Connecticut families are running around, scared of their libraries or librarians? No. ... I don’t think the average 14-year-old kid is going to the library and running into trouble and seeing things that maybe he or she should not see.”

Ritter added, “So I feel bad for the fiscally moderate Republicans because it really hurts their brand. For us, it was sort of just tomfoolery and riffraff. As I said to Juan (Candelaria), let her do it. I don’t care. Because they want the response — like children. ... You hurt your own party. You disrespect your own colleagues when you do that. You don’t disrespect the Democrats.”

But House Republican leader Vincent Candelora of North Branford strongly defended Dauphinais, saying she had the right to speak on a controversial issue. He added that an important public policy should not have been jammed into the budget document at the last minute for a late-night debate in a 693-page bill with numerous other issues.

“What was disrespectful was to have an implementer — a budget bill — that had a lot of policies that went well beyond the budget, and one of them being how libraries are going to be governed now,” Candelora told reporters Tuesday. “Librarians shouldn’t have carte blanche on what ends up in the library. ... There needs to be age-appropriate materials in appropriate sections.”

Candelora added, “When government is providing services to the general public, we want to make sure that there are certain standards that are put in place. So I object to my tax dollars being put in a library that might have pornographic material for children. I would just like assurances that there are age-appropriate sections in libraries. And Democrats, unfortunately, all along in this session have rejected those amendments to provide those protections. ... You saw us push back. It certainly was shocking for people to hear on the House floor, but that is the reality of what is in the libraries around the state of Connecticut.”

Concerning the subsequent firestorm following the reading of the books, Candelora said, “If an elected official has the courage to stand at a podium and say what she said and takes ownership of it, I have no problem with it. ... I don’t think she was trying to be gratuitous. I think she was trying to make a point, and she was quite effective in making that point because we are talking about it today.”

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas, an East Hartford Democrat, said that the deputy speaker “handled it as professionally as could be handled in that situation” and limited the use of harsh language in the debate.

“As someone who has spent a lot of time in libraries and has three children that spend time in libraries, I’m guessing those books are out there,” Rojas said. “I’ve just never had that experience myself. In 17 years as a legislator, I have never had an email from a constituent on an inappropriate book in a library or in a school. ... I’m guessing these books are out there, but I don’t know, as the Speaker noted earlier, that this is what’s top of mind for parents, for families, and for children.”

The issue came up in Sections 345 to 347 of the massive budget document, which is House Bill 7287. The so-called “library bill” had originally been a standalone issue, but it was then inserted into the much-larger budget bill in an effort to ensure its passage before the regular legislative session adjourns at midnight Wednesday.

On the House floor, Democratic state Rep. Larry Butler of Waterbury said he was offended when Dauphinais had read the graphic details in relation to “the library bill,” which was Senate Bill 1271.

“To repeat the vulgarity that is in them, on this floor, is something that we should never hear,” Butler said. “I am so taken aback. So offended. I wasn’t raised like that and certainly didn’t come here to hear that.”

State Rep. Toni Walker, a longtime New Haven Democrat, said she was concerned about the decorum in the chamber on Monday night, adding that young people are often listening to the debates.

A nonpartisan analysis states, “The bill requires the policies to, among other things, ensure that library materials are evaluated and made accessible to conform with applicable state non-discrimination laws, which generally prohibit discrimination based on race, color, sex, gender identity, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability.”

The analysis says the bill “also specifically requires the policies adopted under the bill to, among other things: recognize that library and other materials should represent a wide range of varied and diverging viewpoints ... and prohibit removing library material on the sole basis that someone finds the book offensive or because of the origin, background, or viewpoints of the material’s creator or as expressed in the material.”

In addition, “the school policy must address student access to age-appropriate and grade-level-appropriate material and require a superintendent who receives a reconsideration request to appoint a library material review committee to consider it. Lastly, the bill also grants employees immunity from liability when they perform their duties under the bill and allows them to bring legal action for defamation or damage to their reputations related to the same.”

Ellen Paul, the executive director of the Connecticut Library Consortium that serves more than 1,000 libraries, said, “This bill is enormously important to public and school libraries across the state, and I am so pleased that it passed the House.”

She noted that Rojas “spoke accurately” of relatively few challenges on the issue, adding that there have been controversies in Suffield, Colchester, Fairfield, Newtown, and Guilford.

“I think this is a really common-sense bill,” Paul told The Hartford Courant on Tuesday.

The measure was included in the budget bill that was sent to the state Senate, which was debating the matter Tuesday night. At about 6:40 p.m., the issue was mentioned briefly in the Senate by Republican Sen. Rob Sampson, who said it had nothing to do with banning books. He spoke for only about two minutes before moving onto another area of the budget, saying that other colleagues would address the issue later.

Sen. Henri Martin, a Bristol Republican, said shortly before 10 p.m. that he would not read any excerpts from books that he described as “very vulgar and obscene” in the libraries.

“Parents have little say in the books or materials the library offers,” Martin told his colleagues. “I don’t believe it’s too complicated for people to understand this.”

_____

©2025 Hartford Courant. Visit courant.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.